For whatever reason, Crytek still has yet to make a functional website... Some of you may know me as Talon95, instead it's only letting me show this gay ass other name I used for Crysis 1 like god knows how long ago.

Anyway, many of you may be asking, what does Crytek need to do for Crysis 3? What the hell needs saving!? And I'll be the first to tell you, that Crysis 3 already sounds like it's in dire need of help. From people I know, all I have heard about the announcement of Crysis 3 and what has already been detailed (albeit little) was enough to leave almost everyone that played previous Crytek games with a sour taste in their mouth.

As for credibility, I've played Crytek games since their first release with Far Cry.

First, there are some things that Crysis 2 did correctly:

Oh wait, nevermind. I'll be honest, I can't think of any. I do remember that in Crysis 2, Crytek's ultimate strength was with the overall feeling of the singleplayer.

The dire mistakes of Crysis 2:

1. The story was absolutely forgettable. Crysis 1 left a lot to continue off of with an extremely exciting story that called for epic proportions, but if anything Crysis 2 went in the opposite direction. Prophet kills himself within 30 seconds of the game, Nomad is dead and Psycho is MIA. The story does an extremely bad job of explaining what happened to Nomad and Psycho, in fact, you had to read a comic series to understand any of it. That is one of the many exemplary situations where Richard Morgan with his story line just absolutely fell apart.

Additionally, the story did a very bad job at explaining differences between the aliens, why the fight was being taken to NYC, or anything at all really. It was almost as if playing the prequel to Crysis 2 was a handicap, and not a requirement like many games are. I found myself screaming at my monitor throughout many points of the campaign due to the horrible storyline. I was ready to send 300 nukes through NYC and head back to tropical North Korea islands within the first few hours of gameplay.

2. Silent Protagonists

It works in some games, it works in Half Life, but it certainly did not work in Crysis 2. Alcatraz was as forgettable a character as they come. In fact, he could have been called Nomad and nobody would have noticed the difference. The explanation for his silence was poorly executed and overall, silent protagonists do not work well in a situation where I literally cannot make Yes or No decisions. It feels like my hand is being forced when my character is just silent and I have a bunch of other characters ordering me around like puppetmasters.

3. Leveldesign

The leveldesign in the singleplayer was very choppy. The one level directly after the boss fight in central station was FANTASTIC. For the most part though, the level design was exceedingly linear and offered too few strategic moves. The supposed "vertacality" in Crysis 2 did not nearly make up for the horizontal freedom that Crysis 1 and Warhead offered.

4. AI

The AI was horrendous, certainly not AAA quality. Cevat bragged about the AI being exceedingly smart in interviews but on game release, I saw some of the buggiest AI ever. The AI was stupid, and buggy, to put it bluntly. Anyone that played the SP experienced the horrible AI so I don't really feel the need to go over it.

5. Boss fights

Make the boss fights more memorable. I still have the giant Alien War Ship boss battle at the end of Crysis 1 burned into my memory, the sight of TAC-nukes and other massive scale warfare helped this. The Crysis 2 boss battles were designed for simpletons to beat, and the final boss battle felt like it was literally thrown together in 5 minutes... Anyone could have beaten that one with a blindfold around their head.

6. Multiplayer.

The multiplayer had so many problems but I'm just lumping it all into one little set. First off, the root of the problem with the multiplayer can be directly set on Crytek UK. Why? They had no PC experience going into Crysis 2, they are infamous for buggy products (Haze), and they did not do their proper research on Crysis 1 Multiplayer.

Crysis 2's Multiplayer seemed to be directly ripped out of Call of Duty's playbook. Modules (perks), Nanosuit Reset (Prestige), and the whole gamut of dogtags, skins, emblems, and especially the arena style gamemodes and levels to go with it.

A suggestion: Add versatility to the Multiplayer! You will not beat Call of Duty by copying it. A solid gameplay experience far outweighs the shinyness of a new emblem or weapon skin. Additionally, bring back POWER STRUGGLE! Crysis 2 had a severe lack of this gamemode that made it unenjoyable to even start the multiplayer without it. Add Powerstruggle, add vehicles (tanks heli's aircraft, the whole nine yards). Along with Powerstruggle comes high playercounts, and open maps! Far and away the most popular map in the Crysis franchise is Mesa. See what you did right on that map and expand upon it in Crysis 3 with an urban setting. Powerstruggle is still a gamemode in great demand, it is quite unique and will appeal to veterans and players looking for a change of pace.

The Multiplayer needs a higher skill ceiling. It does not necessarily have to be as high as Crysis 1's was, it was ridiculous in that game. But a high skill ceiling in general will be beneficial since long-time players will be able to gain substantial amounts of skill, this is a very rewarding type gameplay where your time invested might not mean a higher rank, but you will definitely be the player of the game, and the focus of the match.

A remodeling of the multiplayer means a remodeling of the Nanosuit 2. Please bring it back in line with the Nanosuit 1, and that includes the mouse-wheel for PC.

I'm sure I missed out on many things, but feel free to add suggestions. With the announcement of Crysis 3... I'm already hearing about modules, skins, and all this other fluffy jazz. My hopes are not high at all, Crysis 2 was a HUGE disappointment, and Crytek's biggest blunder since their studio opened doors.

Crytek needs to get their act together and return to their roots in a philosophical sense with Crysis 3. It's a longshot, but it's needed. Things that were cherished from past Crysis games (like Power Struggle) need to be incorporated.

Especially with this extremely short development cycle (it's barely even 2 years), great changes are unlikely to be made and it'll be more in line with a Crysis 2.5... But one can put a dim hope on this franchise turning around.

LOL you could just save your time and say that the whole game sucks.I personally LOVE Crysis 2 as it is,yes it has some problems but for me its just with things in MP,i absolutely loved the campaign and everything and i cant wait for Crysis 3 to be either better or the same.

The campaign was by no means bad, I just feel like it did not live up to the expectations set by EA's advertising and the execution of Crysis 1. It was good for an average game but it did not hold up to the Crysis franchise tag...

YoungTalon1995 wrote:The campaign was by no means bad, I just feel like it did not live up to the expectations set by EA's advertising and the execution of Crysis 1. It was good for an average game but it did not hold up to the Crysis franchise tag...

Multiplayer on the other hand, is an entire different animal.

Yeah they are just different opinions for me Crysis 2 presented an entirely different aspect to the franchise the game feels faster,more agile same thing,more intense (especially in Post human warrior) and more but yeah no game is perfect i just hope that some mistakes in Crysis 2 are solved in Crysis 3.

YoungTalon1995 wrote:The campaign was by no means bad, I just feel like it did not live up to the expectations set by EA's advertising and the execution of Crysis 1. It was good for an average game but it did not hold up to the Crysis franchise tag...

Multiplayer on the other hand, is an entire different animal.

Yeah they are just different opinions for me Crysis 2 presented an entirely different aspect to the franchise the game feels faster,more agile same thing,intensive (especially in Post human warrior) and more but yeah no game is perfect i just hope that some mistakes in Crysis 2 are solved in Crysis 3.

If you could use the original Nanosuit to it's full extense with circle and strafe jumping, it was MUCH more agile and provided for much more intense battles than the Nanosuit 2 did.

YoungTalon1995 wrote:The campaign was by no means bad, I just feel like it did not live up to the expectations set by EA's advertising and the execution of Crysis 1. It was good for an average game but it did not hold up to the Crysis franchise tag...

Multiplayer on the other hand, is an entire different animal.

Yeah they are just different opinions for me Crysis 2 presented an entirely different aspect to the franchise the game feels faster,more agile same thing,intensive (especially in Post human warrior) and more but yeah no game is perfect i just hope that some mistakes in Crysis 2 are solved in Crysis 3.

If you could use the original Nanosuit to it's full extense with circle and strafe jumping, it was MUCH more agile and provided for much more intense battles than the Nanosuit 2 did.

You cant compare the battles that you have in Crysis 2 multiplayer with the battles in Crysis Wars for example,Crysis 2 its WAAAY faster and intense.